The Amazing D200.

Started Jun 13, 2013 | Discussions thread
28to70 Veteran Member • Posts: 5,040
Re: D200 = mini medium format with CCD back

FTH wrote:

100% agree, I had a low income a few years from now and really wanted to shoot digital, but compact cameras just werent up to the task at that time, especiallyr regarding DOF control. I spent about 2 years looking for the best camera and saving money for it, after reading several articles praising the D40X as a mini version of the D200, I purchased the D40X with 2 lenses and actually became full time professional using the D40X as main body and Nikon F100 as b&w one. The colors, edge sharpness and slide-film feeling coming from the CCD are just unbeaten today.

Of course, shooting concerts at 800-1600 ISO became very challenging, but the 10MP combine with extremely good shutter and mirror-damping system allowed me to shoot handled @ 1/50th and it was not a big deal to remove chromatic noise from those files. Since then, I made money and bougt a D5100 and finally a D600. Even if I can now shoot video and pump up my images up to 6400 ISO with the D600, the files always need to be worked carefully.

WB is often not right, CMOS sensors also suffer from being highly sensible to mixed light conditions and skin tones or true colors will suffer from that. Shadow recovery will show purple tint on the D5100 and D600 and grey muddy tint on the D300. Nothing like that on the D40X or D200.

The D200 is actually the only last DSLR using a CCD and I truly wished that Nikon would come out with a DSLR integrating the Leica M9 sensor (kodak 18MP CCD) - edge sharpness on CCD is higher than CMOS and I can bearly see an increase of resolution from the D200(10MP) to the D5100 (16MP). I consider the D200 as a mini medium format back with better AF - actually, it is the best Nikon DSLR for true color reproduction, panoramic work, and portrait work. And 16X20 prints come out beautifully.

PhotoKhan wrote:

Back in 2004 I was considering both Nikon and Canon as the DSLR brands I could migrate to (...Olympus could also have been a contender as I love their colors but, by then, I had already developed this personal pet-peeve with the 4:3 format...I just feel it as "uncomfortable" for photography...)

Owning a Coolpix 5700 at the time and impressed by the D100, I was leaning a bit towards Nikon when I won a national magazine contest and was offered a Canon 300D and kit lens.

Faced with the idea of having to convert the 300D into money and that, in turn, into a Nikon camera and fascinated by Canon's image quality in their tele L zooms and primes, I kept the Canon and, can now say, don't have a bit of regret about that early decision.

The Canon DSLR system has served my meager photography in a most apt, cost-effective way (...this perception might very well change though, if they continue this latest trend of price hiking on new lenses offerings... )

Soon after my decision, the D200 came out.

Right from the beginning I found its output an extremely engaging one, both for color and contrast rendition. I found it quite "film-like", as if Nilon had created the camera to render images with an "emulsion feeling" to them but with a superior quality that could hardly be consistently extracted from the medium, back in film days.

I am posting this here, now, because even up to this day, I am systematically stumbling upon output from the D200 that I am immediately drawn into, even before knowing where the photos came from.

It just happened today, again, with these PBase galleries:

Not that I can't do something similar (..or even better, in some areas..) as this with my current 1DMKIV, because I can...And, I am sure, you guys also can do it with your current cameras but, in the case of the D200, it is as if this output is just "natural", as if a 6-year old could get these same perceived intrinsic qualities by just pointing the camera at his/hers favorite toy and pressing the shutter button.

...So, I now consider the D200 one of the best DSLRs ever made.

It has come to a point that, given the price 2nd-hand ones are going for on Ebay (300/400$) I might very well consider buying one, just for the sake of it.

If it was an FX camera instead of a DX one, so I could more effectively use it with another unique Nikon product, the 12-24, I would be pressing "Buy" right now and get myself a perfect, killer, almost ultimate WA dedicated tool.

If you are (or were) a D200 owner I would love for you guys to post some samples as replies to this thread...and congratulations on a very special camera


Yep.  But we are going to get some flak for our thoughts.  We have already had a preview from one of the posters.  Although a semi retired "pro' and not a techie, there's something about the CCD that I think makes it super(rior.) But, that's just me I guess.  Was it cost that led Nikon to go with CMOS on the next batch of cameras?  It would be interesting to see Nikon come out with an D400 and a CCD sensor.  But I guess that's asking way too much when a D400 might not even come out. Nikon?

Post (hide subjects) Posted by
Keyboard shortcuts:
FForum PPrevious NNext WNext unread UUpvote SSubscribe RReply QQuote BBookmark MMy threads
Color scheme? Blue / Yellow